Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsRetrospective StudyEurope PMCOpen access

Comparative analysis of the therapeutic effect of antibiotic bone cement on Wagner grade 3 or 4 diabetic foot ulcer in heel and non-heel areas: a retrospective cohort study

Jian Y., Li L., Chen W., An W., Guan R., Zhang Y.

Retrospective Study with a reported sample of 35 on Diabetic Foot, Chronic Wound, published in Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsEvidence level of this study

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Retrospective Study
Journal
Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) (2025)
Reported sample size
35
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
41384024
PMCID
PMC12689374
DOI
10.3389/fendo.2025.1662731

Abstract (original English)

Background Heel diabetic foot ulcers (hDFU) represent a particularly severe form of DFU, characterized by prolonged healing times and a significantly elevated risk of major amputation. Effective strategies to control infection and improve outcomes in this high-risk population are urgently needed. While antibiotic bone cement (ABC) has emerged as a promising therapy for general DFU, its specific efficacy for hDFU remains unverified. This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy of ABC-based management for hDFU compared to non-heel DFU (nhDFU) and to identify risk factors for major amputation. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 77 patients with severe (Wagner grade 3 or 4) DFUs treated with an ABC protocol. Patients were stratified into hDFU (n=35) and nhDFU (n=42) groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline characteristics. Outcomes included major amputation rates, length of stay (LOS), infection control [measured by white blood cell (WBC) count], and risk factors analyzed via modified Poisson regression. Results At baseline, the hDFU group presented with greater disease severity, evidenced by significantly lower albumin levels (29.56 ± 6.45 g/L vs. 32.49 ± 5.25 g/L, P = 0.03) and higher WBC counts (Median: 14.86 vs. 10.32 × 10 9 /L, P = 0.002). After PSM, the major amputation rate was not significantly different between the hDFU an

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • Without an adequate control group, treatment effects cannot be separated from other factors.

Evidence level

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

How we grade evidence
HeelHumansDiabetic FootBone CementsAnti-Bacterial AgentsTreatment OutcomeRisk FactorsRetrospective StudiesWound HealingAged

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research